Considering that energy and everything else apparently emerged from out of nothing, do you think the idea of materialism (upward causation) should be considered a disorder?

Interesting subject...


Here's a paper on determinism's effects on "cheating".

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18181791



from the Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism


"Materialism typically contrasts with dualism, phenomenalism, idealism, vitalism and dual-aspect monism. Its materiality can, in some ways, be linked to the concept of Determinism, as espoused by Enlightenment thinkers. It has been criticized as a spiritually empty philosophy."

In my view everything out of balance is disorder

That itself could be considered a compulsive disorder. Ever watch Monk?

In a word YES.

I would like to contribute more to this and I did start to read a little.

One link led to another and I decided that on reaching this piece of info below I called a halt.


The DNA molecule for the single-celled bacterium, E. coli, contains enough information to fill all the books in any of the world's largest libraries.

A single atom contains a lot of information I've heard.

My question would be ... what kind of information and how do we extract it and use it?

Another question to contemplate is this.

Does an element have consciousness potential?

If elements do not have consciousness potential, then how is it that we are conscious?

Where would you draw the line between consciousness potential and consciousness?

At what point did consciousness arrive?

Rejection of materialism by some scientists
Michael Polanyi was a notable critic of materialism. In Life's irreducible structure (1968),[23] he argued that the information contained in the DNA molecule is irreducible to physics and chemistry. Although a DNA molecule cannot exist without physical properties, these properties are constrained by higher level ordering principles. In Transcendence and Self-transcendence (1970),[24] Polanyi criticised the materialistic world view that modern science has inherited from Galileo.

Some modern day physicists and science writers such as Paul Davies and John Gribbin have openly expressed how scientific finds in physics such as quantum mechanics and chaos theory have disproven materialism. In their 1991 book The Matter Myth in the first chapter titled The death of materialism they wrote:

Then came our Quantum theory, which totally transformed our image of matter. The old assumption that the microscopic world of atoms was simply a scaled-down version of the everyday world had to be abandoned. Newton's deterministic machine was replaced by a shadowy and paradoxical conjunction of waves and particles, governed by the laws of chance, rather than the rigid rules of causality.

An extension of the quantum theory goes beyond even this; it paints a picture in which solid matter dissolves away, to be replaced by weird excitations and vibrations of invisible field energy. Quantum physics undermines materialism because it reveals that matter has far less 'substance' than we might believe. But another development goes even further by demolishing Newton's image of matter as inert lumps. This development is the theory of chaos, which has recently gained widespread attention.

— Paul Davies and John Gribbin, 'The Matter Myth', Chapter 1

Religious and spiritual objections

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, materialism denies the existence of both deities and "souls."[25] It is therefore incompatible with most world religions including Christianity, Judaism and Islam. In most of Hinduism and Transcendentalism, all matter is believed to be an illusion called Maya, blinding us from knowing the truth. Maya is the limited, purely physical and mental reality in which our everyday consciousness has become entangled. Maya gets destroyed for a person when they perceive Brahman with transcendental knowledge.

Thanks, I was going to ask for your definition. Now, what is your question exactly?

As to "what is consciousness," good luck with that one.

Maya is the limited, purely physical and mental reality in which our everyday consciousness has become entangled.

Have materialists mistaken Maya for reality?

Considering that scientists postulate that the Big bang is how the universe came into existence and from that, somehow consciousness emerged; materialist thinking just doesn't make sense.

Materialist's believe that consciousness emerged from the slime. Spiritualist believe that life emerged from cosmic consciousness.

Why have you differentiated ‘energy’ from ‘everything else’? What are you including in ‘everything else’ and are you making a claim or asserting a belief?



Can you explain how the second quote is related to the first one in order to clarify the question that seems to be related to the topic of your thread?

Why have you differentiated ‘energy’ from ‘everything else’?

Unless you are claiming that energy is all that exists, "everything else" would include anything that exists that is not called or considered "energy."

(Not that I am making the claim that energy is all that exists.)

So what exists? If matter is to be identified as something different than energy, then there are three things that exist.

Matter, energy and consciousness.

If Matter is to be considered the same as energy, then there are two things that exist.

Energy and consciousness.

If consciousness is energy, then only one thing exists.

That is consciousness. (awareness or potentiality for awareness)

Can you explain how the second quote is related to the first one in order to clarify the question that seems to be related to the topic of your thread?

I will try.

The first quote identifies the belief that 'something' (universal material, life and consciousness) came from nothing. (via the big bang theory)

The second quote identifies the (illogical) belief that the only thing that exists is material, (matter and energy)-(or just energy) and that consciousness is somehow born or created out of that material.

So did energy/matter manifest itself? Wouldn't something else be necessary?

The materialist belief is that energy/matter evolved into intelligent living conscious beings.

I believe they are overlooking something.

P.S.

Spacetime (time and space) are not things that exist.

I forgot to address this question...



Thanks for the question. I guess I am making a claim.

If energy is all that exists, then its conscious energy.

Or asking the question:

Is energy conscious or is consciousness energy?

In the terms of religious notions you could say that the trinity is this:

The father = consciousness
The Holy Spirit = energy
The Son = Matter

The materialist view of that would be this:

The father = Matter
The Holy Spirit = energy
The son = consciousness.

I've studied Hinduism and Buddhism quite a bit, so I understand what Maya is very well. That wasn't what I asked. Plus, just because those religions have this theory about Maya doesn't make it true.

You are making a lot of assumptions. Physicists are now questioning the Big Bang theory.

I consider myself a materialist and I don't believe that "consciousness emerged from the slime." Life emerged somehow (it's beyond me just how) from what is called the primordial soup. I find it incredible (but not utterly impossible) that life at such a simple stage could have any consciousness.

Trying to ascribe religious notions to the thinking of a materialists shows a deep misunderstanding of the thought processes of a materialist. Not everybody cares about spiritualism. What I don't understand is why, if a materialist can leave a religious person's life alone, the religious person can't do the same for the materialist.

I could just as well call your way of thinking a disorder. Let's not insult each other, okay?

"What I don't understand is why, if a materialist can leave a religious person's life alone, the religious person can't do the same for the materialist."

This thread is in response to a thread by Red that did exactly what you are suggesting that materialists don't do. Materialists DON'T leave it alone when they are suggesting that Religious fundamentalism might be a disorder.

Personally I am happy with my world view and beliefs. I am happy to allow materialists to stay right where they are. But when they start suggesting that religious fundamentalism might be studied as a disorder, I take issue with that kind of thinking.

If religious fundamentalism is to be considered a disorder, then where will they draw the line with other spiritual notions, such as my own?

I feel that if Red wants to suggest that religious (or spiritual) notions and beliefs are a disorder just because they don't fall into a materialist's box, then I would express my own (very sincere) feeling that materialism is also a candidate for being considered a disorder.

I state my logic for this in this thread.

Also, if some scientists are now questioning the big bang theory, then good for them, but it still leaves the question of first cause unanswered.

I have seen the thought process of a materialist, and it has some great big holes and huge unanswered questions in it.

"slime" = "Primordial soup"

So, yes, you believe that consciousness emerged from the slime.

So I will ask you the next question which no materialist has yet been able to answer.

If the primordial soup/slime and organisms or elements at such a simple stage don't have any consciousness, .....

then

There had to be an event whereby suddenly consciousness appeared.

Where and what is that event?

Next:

It is my claim that consciousness exists on many levels and that everything that exists manifested in this material reality has some degree of consciousness.

If this is not true, then it is my claim that there has to be an event where consciousness on some level was born, or emerged from the slime.

There are only two choices here if we agree that there are living conscious beings in this universe.

1. Everything has some degree of consciousness
2. or: At some point there was a miraculous event where consciousness was born.

Memory = Consciousness